One of the biggest lies in the current political divide

I would suspect that if the anti gun forces tried to forcibly collect all the guns legally owned now, there would be no more anti gun forces within a month of that happening

 

Beto O'Rourke's call for mandatory buyback of assault weapons roils Texas politics

How does he plan to deal with mass non-compliance?

 

He'll illegally deploy the National Guard.

 

And then what?

 

He'll order the National Guard to go house to house searching for firearms.

 

So why does the gun industry put so much effort into promoting guns that look like the real deal and why do so many gun owners want those guns?

The gun industry has gone from marketing guns that look like this:


to guns that look like this:


Adaptive combat rifle? Many missions? What in the world are they talking about? Do most gun owners have some secret fantasy about being a real soldier that they are trying to appeal to?

 

Anyone who says that no one wants to confiscate firearms is liar. We had two presidential elections in a row with democrat candidates literally and openly calling for confiscation. First was Hilary saying we need an Australian style buy back program in 2016. In other words a mandatory gun buy back. Then we had good ol Beto saying “hell yes we’re going to take your AR-15” in 2020. So anyone who claims no one wants to take your guns is a flat out liar.

Let’s not forget Biden’s comments on banning the 9mm as well.

 

Guns aren't supposed to look like guns? So we need to start making guns that look like kumquats" Or a petunia that fires bullets? Maybe a semi-auto snowflake? What the heck are you talking about?

Guns are a great hobby. From fun competition, to gunsmithing (a close relative to puttering around with that '57 Chevy in the driveway), to reloading (which require very relaxing quiet concentration)... guns are a good thing.

If you don't think guns should look like guns... here's one that looks like a prop from STAR WARS:

 

It’s easily proven just from the last two presidential elections

 

I find it funny that people worry about the looks of a gun.

take this gun for example

https://www.rockislandauction.com/d...tiller-precision-shadowtrax-bolt-action-rifle

bolt action rifle that is far more deadly than any AR-15. In fact it’s so deadly you’re not even allowed to use them hunting because it’s too easy to kill an animal with it. So easy they say it’s not sporting. You can use AR-15 and AR-10’s to hunt because you can still miss and it still relies on marksmanship. The example gun does all the marksmanship for you. But there is that ethical kill argument. The example gun almost guarantees a fast kill with as little suffering as possible where the AR’s with human error can get a gut shot or a leg shot that gives lots of agony and may not even kill the animal. So I think they should be legal but to each their own.


The main point is that AR’s are not the scariest gun out their by far. And the looks means absolutely nothing

 

With a single AR-15 lower, I can easily adapt it for long distance shooting, 3 gun competition, big game hunting, predator hunting, varmint hunting and self defense.

Try that with the rifle you pictured.

 

Why does the gun industry manufacture and market guns that are as close to the real deal (real combat weapons) as legally possible? It seems they are trying to appeal to some fantasy that many gun owners have. You can see why some people would get confused.

 

A former gun industry insider reveals:

"This transformation received its first boost in the mid-aughts when President George W. Bush allowed the assault-weapons ban to sunset and then signed a bill that gave broad protection from liability to gunmakers. Combined, those moves reduced the social stigma and potential legal penalties for edgy marketing of military-style rifles...

"Few of this new breed of firearms company are more illustrative of the dramatic transformation that has taken place in the U.S. gun market than Daniel Defense. Like scores of entrepreneurs who saw this opportunity in the early 2000s, Marty Daniel started a gun company that soon turned to AR-15 sales. And he set a new industry standard by leaning into a civilian market for guns touted as the military real deal. One of the company’s early ads, in 2012, lured young men with the promise of being on par with Special Forces soldiers....

"In that instant, my fears for what the industry was doing became very personal. I did not myself sell AR-15s or participate in the incendiary marketing, but I could no longer ignore the fact that my business was profiting from promoting images of such men, with their backward-facing ball caps and loaded AR-15 rifles. This type of vigilante or self-styled militiaman was preparing to deploy across the country, in our hometown, or other hometowns like Kenosha, Wisconsin....

"By 2021, I had quit the gun industry. I now work on the outside to alert the American public to the dangers I see in this marketing. To me, it undeniably created a culture of extremism that encouraged a new type of 'tactical' mass shooter. America is seeing the deadly results of the violence incubated by these dark advertising fantasies."
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/07/firearms-industry-marketing-mass-shooter/670621/

 

When I was a little boy, I had a remarkably real looking .45 cap pistol. It looked exactly like a real M1911. It fired caps and was loads of fun. No one was ever hurt as we played "war" all over the neighborhood, from the ballfield to the backyard. It was great fun. And no one ever talked about any "danger"... except that our side might win!

 

Do you hide under your bed a lot? Do Brussel sprouts scare you?

 

Because they are multi-use and unsurpassed for modification.

 

So we're up to about 24 million of them, and about 24 have been used in mass shootings.

 

Look at Canada. Trudeau just banned the transfer of handguns. It goes step by step until gonernment is the only one allowed to have guns.

well, government and criminals but the line between those groups just gets more and more blurred.

 

well there are far more reasons than the sinister ones you make up and dishonestly attribute to most gun owners

1) civilian rifles that use common military parts are easier to repair, often cheaper than similarly performing rifles that don't have military markets and magazines are much easier to find. On top of that military cartridges are cheaper to obtain. Go and price the cost of 1000 556 NATO or .223 FMJ rounds and then price the same amount of ammo in .222 caliber-two cartridges that are essentially the same. Or 9mm vs. .380 ACP. If you reload-as I do 9mm brass is often next to nothing.


2) many gunsmiths learned their trade in the military and are very familiar with how to repair say AR 15s, Beretta 92s, Colt 1911s, Springfield Amory M1A1s and MI Carbines-all of which are extensively owned by private citizens


3) many people learned how to shoot while in the military and want to buy something they are familiar with-even if it lacks the full auto feature. Many men of my late father's generation often kept a Colt 1911 or a MI Carbine as a home defense weapon. My dad had a 1911 for that purpose which was later replaced by a far more effective Benelli shotgun I gave him. When I first became a world class shooter, I asked him why he kept that 45 and he said watch this. He turned off the lights in his study, and stripped the 1911. Turned the lights on and showed me, then he turned the lights off again and put it together again. He noted the navy taught him that 30 years ago and he never forgot.

 

Wow. Its almost as if he hasn't read the constitution.

 

At least you tried.

 

Gun banners target these weapons for many reasons-none of which are based on a legitimate (if ignorant) desire to reduce crime. big government fans want to get rid of the best of easily available weapons that civilians can use to resist a government gone bad. Gun banners want to ban weapons rarely used in crime to set a precedent to ban anything that has more incidents of criminal misuse (like shotguns and handguns). Gun banners also see AR 15 owners as more likely to be unwavering in our support of our rights over say a scared inner city single mother who might have a Raven or a used revolver purely for home defense.

 

This is is a lie. I wonder how many other lies there are here...

....thereby codifying in to law the same protections enjoyed by every other company in the US.

Social stigma... for owning an AR15?
Potential legal penalties... like those Ford suffers every time someone steals a Mustang and kills someone with it?
Remember when I asked about lies? There's two more.

Picture, or it didn't happen.

 

The "like" wasn't enough... GREAT POST!

 

~ Watching the recent rulings of the US Supreme Court it appears that the 2nd and 1st Amendment may be in the same category.